Hall v. Huff

74 Ga. 409, 1885 Ga. LEXIS 325
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided January 21, 1885·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

A bill was filed to cancel a number of deeds to real estate, held by different persons, or to recover damages against the makers of the deeds, in case they were not cancelled. On the trial, the jury found a verdict in answer to certain special questions m respect to fraud, notice, etc. The decree adopted the findings of the jury, and adjudged the title of the defendants good against the complainants Exception was taken to this, and the assignment of error was as follows: “ To which judgment and decree the complainants excepted, and now except, and assign the same as error:”

Held, that such an assignment of error was too general. It is incumbent on the plaintiff in error to specify plainly the decision complained of, and the error alleged to exist therein; and unless this is done, the case cannot be considered by this court. Code, §4251; Higgins vs. Cherolcee R. R. Co., 73 Qa., 149; 60 Id., 407.

Writ of error dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hall v. Huff, 74 Ga. 409, 1885 Ga. LEXIS 325 (Ga. 1885).

74 Ga. 409 (Hall v. Huff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sherrill v. Sherrill
42 S.E.2d 921 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Petty v. Bryant
2 S.E.2d 910 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Greenwood v. Ledford
166 S.E. 839 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Johnson v. Lowry
160 S.E. 875 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Haley v. Commercial National Bank
94 S.E. 1013 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1918)
Horkan v. City of Moultrie
89 S.E. 681 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1916)
Kennedy v. Kennedy
87 S.E. 157 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)
Binion v. Georgia Southern & Florida Ry. Co.
45 S.E. 276 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)
Eastmore v. Bunkley
39 S.E. 105 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)
Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Anderson
28 S.E. 382 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)